Since his inauguration, I have struggled to like Governor Dennis Daugaard. I would like to believe that, while we have our policy disagreements, he at least represents a reasonably mainstream wing of the Republican party. Alas, the Governor keeps doing and saying things that make me think that South Dakota really is ruled by wingnuts.
Two weeks ago, the Center for Public Integrity released the results of its State Integrity Investigation. That 18-month study based on information gathered by local reporters in each state ranked South Dakota second in the nation for risk of state government corruption.
A constituent and occasional reader wrote to Governor Dennis Daugaard to express concern about the F South Dakota received on this report card. The Governor's office responds with the same rebuttal offered by chief of staff Dusty Johnson in the report itself: South Dakota government has good ethics policies and enforcement, and even if government misbehaves, we have a "free and energetic press" to keep government honest. The letter appeals to "common sense" and poo-poos a state ethics commission as "another layer of bureaucracy," a "board of experts."
Remember, when right-wingers say "experts," they don't mean it as a compliment.
The defense turns hard right in this paragraph:
As you glance over the rankings of the states, you'll see a trend: blue states outscore red states. For example, New Jersey and California are among the top five and the most conservative states—Wyoming, South Dakota, and Georgia—rank as the bottom three. Upon further investigation, I found that though this group labels themselves as "non-partisan," many, like journalists from the Las [sic] Angeles Times and the New York Times, say this group is liberal. In fact, the Center for Public Integrity receives most of its funding from a well-known leftist: George Soros [Kelsey Pritchard, Director of Constituent Services, letter to South Dakota citizen, 2012.03.21].
Ah yes, George Soros, one of Fox News watchers' favorite bogeymen. Harken to the echoes of that evil European-accented laugh. Brand the group as leftist. Crib the Wikipedia note about both the LA and NY Times using the word "liberal" (while failing to note that the cited mentions come from one article from each paper on the same topic from 1996).
Now the reader who submitted this letter is a rather strong right-winger, so it could be that Governor Daugaard's office is simply selling its message to its audience in terms to which it thinks that audience will be most receptive, in this case, Soros-conspiracy fears and red-state-blue-state paranoia.
But I'm dismayed that, in communication with constituents concerned about corruption, the Governor's first impulse is to attack the messenger in terms dear to wingnut hearts rather than focusing on South Dakota's purportedly positive efforts to reduce the risk of government gone wrong. In such rhetorical tactics, the Governor casts himself as much less a uniting moderate and much more a right-wing warrior.
This conservative could care less about the Communist Democrat versus the fascist GOP feud. The National Education Association (leading special interest for the Connunist Democrats) joined fources with the South Dakota Chamber of Commerce (leading special interest for the fascist SDGOP) to campaign against Initiated Measure 10 in 2008:
http://sibbyonline.blogs.com/sibbyonline/2008/10/the-nea-and-the-chamber-of-commerce.html
IM10 was to address the corruption risk. Dusty Johnson was against it. Said it would have given businesses an advantage over government. So then why was the Chamber against it Dusty?
Speaking of corruption and IM 10, perhaps Mr. Sibson would inform South Dakotans who was the secret source of the money funneled to the IM 10 organization of which Mr. Sibson was a member. We've been waiting since 2008 for that information.
Typical pro-big government attitude that the citizens have to be transparent. The authors of the Federalist Papers were anonymous, and why...so they would not be victims of retaliation. Same goes for those putting the Republican Platform scorecards. Look at what was done to Stace Nelson for just putting it up on a web site. And Mr. Mercer participated in those attacks with half-baked allegations.
Bob, and speaking of half-baked, when are you and the rest of the media folks going to straighten the citizens out on the fake budget crisis created by Daugaard and the media last year?
And Bob, you reported these "notable" candidates:
Other notable candidacies include Republican G. Mark Mickelson of Sioux Falls, the son and grandson of former governors; Democrat Susan Randall of Sioux Falls, a long-time lobbyist for children’s causes; and Republican Mary Duvall of Pierre, a long-time lobbyist for South Dakota Farm Bureau.
http://www.aberdeennews.com/news/bobmercer/aan-wild-legislative-campaigns-foreseen-in-south-dakota-20120327,0,7953011.story?track=rss
Was wondering why you did not consider Scott Bartlett, who was involved in the Constitution Party, as being notable? And of course I have to ask why one who ran as an Independent in 2010 was also not notable. Seems to be an obvious anti-conservative bias.
Montana governor wants Canadian style health care for his state:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/interview-schweitzers-plan-to-bring-canadian-health-care-to-montana/2011/10/03/gIQA025JIL_blog.html